SP in Chatsworth CA

Forgive multiple postings in Western, UP, and CA Commuter but am hoping for a good response.

Does anyone know why the SP chose the circuitous route they did to cross the Sta Susanna mountains thru Chatsworth. I grew up in Chatsworth in the 70's and of course by then the area was pretty developped. But I'm sure when they built this the area was sparse. I know the grade would have been important but it seems they could have had a more direct route. Look at the below link to a hybrid photo map of the area. You can clearly see the RR and it seems rather than building a second tunnel (between the 2 parks) they could have sloped down to the valley thru what is now Chatsworth Park South and continued fairly straight down to Lassen St. The rest of the line thru the valley takes the most direct route from NW to SE so what was happening in Chatsworth at the time of building that caused the circuitous routing? Any insight appreciated.

BTW, this is the route that the MetroLink Ventura County line follows.

http://maps.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTExNmI ... 6&q1=91311

This is just a guess, but often when you see something like that it means the railroad chose a circuitous route because the difference in elevation between the two locations would have resulted in too severe a gradient if laid out in a more direct line. A good example is in San Diego, where the horseshoe curve on the Orange (?) Line to El Cajon is on a small enough scale that you can see that a direct line would have resulted in an impracticable gradient. It's hard to tell from an aerial, and I'm too far away to check it out on the ground, but I'd be surprised if that isn't the reason the line snakes around to the north and west of Chatsworth.

Thats what I thought too until I started looking at the aerial photos. Seems like they could have handled any gradient by making an embankment or a trestle. Any additional cost there would have been offset by not having to drill a second tunnel as they head north. Would be interesting if we could find any historical data. There is an historical socirty in Chatsworth. I will pose the question to them and see what results.

drewh wrote:Thats what I thought too until I started looking at the aerial photos. Seems like they could have handled any gradient by making an embankment or a trestle. Any additional cost there would have been offset by not having to drill a second tunnel as they head north. Would be interesting if we could find any historical data. There is an historical socirty in Chatsworth. I will pose the question to them and see what results.

Please post whatever you come up with--it would be interesting to know.

Sure will. Was planning on doing so.

Well no luck with the Chatsworth Historical Society. They were very nice and responded quickly, but didn't have any details about the RR construction. They did aghree that the area was very sparsely populated at the time.

drewh wrote:Well no luck with the Chatsworth Historical Society. They were very nice and responded quickly, but didn't have any details about the RR construction. They did aghree that the area was very sparsely populated at the time.

Thanks for getting into it with them. The only other reason I could think of would be if there was a prominent landowner at the time who owned that land and flatly refused to let the railroad cross it, although I should think eminent domain would have trumped that, especially since the SP was still accustomed to getting its own way in California. I seem to recall, though, that you start climbing as soon as you pass CP TOPANGA headed west, suggesting that there is a difference in elevation which might be difficult to check in an aerial photo.